Fort Hays State University Fort Hays State University

FHSU Scholars Repository FHSU Scholars Repository

Faculty Senate

9-13-1976

Fort Hays State University Faculty Senate Minutes, September 13, Fort Hays State University Faculty Senate Minutes, September 13,

1976 1976

FHSU Faculty Senate

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/sen_all

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation FHSU Faculty Senate, "Fort Hays State University Faculty Senate Minutes, September 13, 1976" (1976). Faculty Senate. 657. https://scholars.fhsu.edu/sen_all/657

This Minutes is brought to you for free and open access by FHSU Scholars Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Senate by an authorized administrator of FHSU Scholars Repository.

FACULTY SENATE MINUTESSeptember 13, 1976

Mr. Dan Rupp, President of the Facu~ty Senate, called the meeting toorder at ·3:30 P.M., September 13,1976, in the Santa Fe Room, Memorial Union.

I. Roll Call and Approval of the Minutes.Members Present: Ms. Joanne Harwick, Dr. Clifford Edwards, Mr. Mike

Walker, Ms. Leona Pfeifer, Mr. Robert Brown, Dr. LewisMiller, Dr. Lloyd FrereI', Dr.Wall?ice Harris, Mr. EltonSchroder, Dr. Ed Shearer, Dr. Richard Zakrzewski,Dr. ~harles Votaw, Dr. Stanley Robertson, Mr. Dale PeierMs. Ellen Veed, Ms~ Vera Thomas, Mr. Dan Rupp, Dr. AllanBusch, Dr. Patrick Dni.nan , Dr. Ron Smith, Dr . .Lcui.sFillinger, Dr. Billy Daley, Ms. Donna Harsh, Mr. EdMcNeil, Mr. Glenn Ginther, Ms. Esta Lou Riley, Ms. RoseBrungardt.

Members Absent: Dr. Steven Tramel, Mr. Keith Campbell, Ms. OrveneJohnson, Ms. June Krebs, Mr. Donald Jacobs, Dr. SuzanneTrauth.

Also Present: Mr. James Beck for Campbell, Ms. Sandria Godwin forKrebs, Ms. Calvina Thomas for Jacobs, Ms. Sandy Johnson.

There being po additions or corrections to the minutes, they were ap­proved as distributed to the faculty.

II. Mr. Rupp introduced the Senate's special guest, Dr. Harold Eickhoff,Vice President for Academic Affairs, who on request from Mr. Rupp and thenew Faculty Senate President, Dr. Charles Votaw, agreed to address theFaculty Senate and to answer questions from the floor.

Dr. Eickhoff expressed his thanks for the invitation and stated that hewould spend a few minutes on his interest in the Faculty Senate and thenreceive questions as time permitteq~ He said he would be looking to theFaculty Senate for expressions of faculty concerns, not exclusively in thatregard, but as "spokesbody", the voice of the faculty. Dr. Eickhoff feltthat a st~ong Senate is an asset to any institution and would say more aboutthat later.

Dr. Eickhoff reminded the Senate of his remarks to the faculty at the openingof the Fall Term. He said two things at that time which he felt should berepeated: (1) that any ~ollege can~ot be strong without a strong facultyvoice in the affairs of the institutions, and (2) that decisions from theVice President's Office will be challenged from time to time and some of thatchallenge will corne from the Faculty Senate.

Dr. Eickhoff stated he wished to move on to several points that will be mat­ters of concern this year and in years to corne.

(1) There has always been concern for the appropriate role of the Senate andthat of administration in a collegiate institution. Dr. Eickhoff felt thatabsolute definitions of those roles are very difficult to arrive at andprobably should not be attempted "with any great clarity." Each institution

2

should work out its own system and there should be an "evolutionary quality"about the relationship between the Faculty Senate and the Administration.

(2) The question of what is administration and what is policy has alwaysgenerated concern. Dr. Eickhoff stated that administration has been dele­gated to the President and his staff. However, there is also a recognitionwithin the institution of the faculty participation in formulating policy.Agreement can be gained on those points. The conflict usually arises overwhat really is administration versus what really is policy. Semanticsand plain definitions are then involved because the formulation of policyoften invades administrative prerogatives and administrative decisions oftenmake policy. Dr. Eickhoff stressed that it is important for us to recognizethat while policy formulation is the "legitimate preserve and prerogative ofthe Faculty Senate," the carrying out of policy (partly faculty recommenda­tions and Board of Regent's policy) is "clearly the province of the admini­stration." There is often an overlap, which then requires patience for theresolution of differences in opinion. Dr. Eickhoff added his hope that theSenate would never be a "Forum for taking cheap shots at the administration."The proper approach in areas of conflict is to resolve those differences on

.a personal 'l evel if possible through telephone calls and personal visits. Heintends to follow such a procedure and "hope s others will. Avoidance of thepersonal approach tends to produce "polarization," and "I believe in almostevery instance, it tends to produce paralysis rather than productive efforts."Dr. Eickhoff stated he will begin "with a respect for the Faculty Senate anda respect for its role within the college and a hope that it is reciprocated."He added that he would like to repeat here what he said in his interviewwith the Search Committee when asked about his feelings on strong faculty in­put into th~ administrative side of the institution. "I said I feel fineabout that; a college, I believe, cannot be strong unless it has good, solidfaculty input into its operation, into its governance."

(3) Dr. Eickhoff made a final point, drawn from his earlier address to thefaculty, in regard to "standards of performance." He believes he has highpersonal standards of performance and expects ,those he works with to have thesame. In regard to the faculty this means a continued emphasis on "qualityof instruction, quality of academic effort. And I just think that we cannot,say that often enough, cannot remind ourselves often enougA, cannot examineour standards often enough; it just cannot be done too much. Ultimately thetest of whether this institution is worthy of its name is the quality of theeducation we give to our students .. . . " He added that we are in "periloustimes in that regard because all the forces in higher education... arepushing in another direction," not higher quality but poorer quality.Dr. Eickhoff then reminded the Senate of the institution's funding, if en­rollment goes up there is more money, if it goes down there is less, that is,formula budgeting. When numbers become the primary concern, a hard time pre­serving quality ensues. The question must necessarily arise "whether we areproperly addressing the issue of keeping our enrollment stable or at leastkeeping it to the point where we do not damage ourselves financially on theone hand and still preserve and upgrade the quality of our offerings." Hewill cheer when he hears the faculty's concern for increasing the quality ofthe offerings at FHS and we will see him working very hard to enhance thatquality.

//

3

III. Dr. Eickhoff left off his address at this point and .opened the floor toquestions.

Dr. Edwards asked what relationship Dr. Eickhoff sees between the "blue­ribbon task force" and the Faculty Senate?Dr. Eickhoff answered that an honest response would be an "evolving re­lationship." The "task force" is to be a beginning, to develop a targetfor the ' institution. The decision to form the "task force" was fairly

. arbitrary, but only to get something moving, later to rely on the tradi­tionallines of communication to develop specific programs and to implementthe principles enumerated in the "task force" statement. He thought hisanswer might seem like "double-talk;" however, no particular arrangementhas been made for implementation of any statement from the "task force."Various groups ; students, faculty, towns-people, Regents, Regents' stBffand political figures will be in on the planning; implementation will alsoinvolve various bodies, Faculty Senate, Student Senate, Administration,Alumni, working through implementation committees. Dr. Eickhoff does notbelieve that a new system of governance will emerge but that it should beconsidered along with many other matters.

Dr. Drinan posed three questions: What kind of time span does Dr. Eickhoffforesee for the Blue-ribbon Committee? How open does he think this processwill be - will there be progress reports? What is going to be the relation­ship of the stablished Academic Long-Range Planning Committee to this blue­ribbon Committee?Dr. Eickhoff answered that in regard to the timetable, since good time has beenmade so far., he m~ght expect a completed document around April 1st or alittle sooner. The process will be for t~e 'Bl ue - r i bbon Committee to come upwith a statement from its meeting Sept. 30th and Oct. 1st. Secondly, theStatement will be distributed across the campus community and beyond. Thirdly,the statement wi th those revisions will be considered, from which will emergea second draft, which .will go through the same process. Dr. Eickhoff assumesa final draft would then emerge from the Committee. He said there will beopen, public hearings on the campus toward the end of 't he first and the be­ginning of the second semester. Finally, the document would be recommendedto the President, with ' any minority reports. As regards the Long-Range Plan­ning Committee, Dr. Eickhoff sees it as the coordinator of the various com­mittees working toward implementation of the Statement. He envisions theLRPC as the most prestigious and most important committee on campus as itwill pull together all the efforts to give them a sense of direction.

Dr. Zakrzewski asked if Dr. Eickhoff v.isualizes the Statement of the Blue­ribbon Committee as a very specific document as a general, philosophicaldocument?Dr. Eickhoff replied, it would be the latter, quite general, probably lessthan ten pages, double-spaced typescript. He thought it might be like theTen Commandments, (Laughter) or Luther's Small Catechism, where the TenCommandments are followed by a half page of meaning. The task of the com­mittees will be to produce the pages of implementation for the broad, philo­sophical statement. There will 'be some insecurity as the document will seemambi ;uous; however, plenty of time will be available for explanation.

4

Dr. Zakrewski asked how large the Blue-ribbon Task Force is?

Dr. Eickhoff answered that the gr9uP is about thirty people, nearly halffaculty, Department Chairmen are heavily represented as they representexcellent choices with their in-between status.

Dr. Robertson asked if Dr. Eickhoff has any particular goals for the collegeuntil the general statement of direction is forthcoming?

Dr. Eickhoff replied that he has. Those goals are the priorities that hehas set up for his office in the meantime. He will "develop a rationalsystem of evaluation through the entire academic side of the college," todefine the role of the Deans and their accountability, the role of Depart-ment Chairmen and of faculty members. It is not meant to "strike terror"but to be helpful. Dr. Eickhoff is concerned about what seems a ratherambiguous framework for the evaluation of faculty performanc~. Evaluationof us all is inescapable; it is Regent's policy, perhaps even Kansas law,that no salary increases may be given other than for merit. Therefore, heintends to provide all with a definition of evaluation that will help themunderstand why they receive twice the salary increase they expected. (Laughter).

Dr. Miller asked if Dr. Eickhoff envisioned the time when admiriistratorswill be evaluated?

Dr. Eickhoff replied that such was unavoidable. There cannot be one setof rules for faculty and another for administration. He expects PresidentTomanek to inform him of the reasons for his own re'-appointment next year,that' hopefully the President will consult with the Deans, faculty, communityand perhaps even family (usually his strong supporters) and take all theinformation into account. Deans should be evaluated by Department Chairmenand faculty.

Mr. McNeil asked if Dr. Eickhoff would entertain suggestions on evaluationof administration?

Dr. ~~ckhoffanswered that he would accept suggestions an~ assumed they wouldcome 'with fairness and objectivity.He added that there are other areas of concern besides evaluation of per­formance. One area of concern is the library. Dr. Eickhoff wonders if thesupport we have been giving the library is not foolish in the long run. Heis now examining the library's condition, "to see what is going to happenin the library if we continue to behave toward it as we have for the lasttwo or three years ... five years down the road~"

He expressed concern about the computers center and its support to the aca­demic community. The budgeting process is another concern. To Dr. Eickhoffit only makes sense to evaluate a budget as it supports programs rather thanconcentrate on line items so that one does not inadvertently make cuts inline items of the budget, only to discover too late that such cuts were aserious mistake.

Dr. Li ckhof f cited Continuing Education, particularly the off-campus program,as another area of concern. He feels that we cannot ignore the significance

/

//

5

in the number of off-campus enrollments. We cannot ignore the College'sresponsibility to take courses where people will enroll in them. There maybe some physical obstacles such as distance but potential enrollment mustnot be ignored. As the on-campus enrollment continues to decline, the off­campus enrollment takes up the slack. We must look at the continuingeducation market ·i f we are going to keep our enrollment of quality students.

Ms. Veed asked Dr. Eickhoff what he sees as the role of the faculty in thesebudget decisions, particularly when cuts come around increasingly?

Dr. Eickhoff replied that regarding departmental requests he tended to seethem as primarily administrative exercises. By that he means that -he wouldnot look to the faculty for advice where to cut the budget. He would lookto the Deans and the Department Chairmen. Pressure would be maintai~ed onthe Deans and through them the Department Chairmen to make the judgments .wisely and he will assume they are making them in consultation with the faculty.Dr. Eickhoff added that he has informed the Faculty Senate of some of hisconcerns which he will address this year through his office. He would alsolike to know whether these are the areas of concern that he should be ad'­dressing, are there more, or are they "non-problem" areas?

Mr. Rupp asked whether there is any possible way that certain administrativeoffices or functions in certain offices might be consolidated?

Dr. Eickhoff asked Mr. Rupp if he had anything specific in mind?

Mr. Rupp replied that he was thinking of alumni, housing--those kinds ofareas. Is there any possibility of combining certain areas like these?

Dr. Eickhoff answered that for an institution of this size, the organizationreflects three areas of administration which can be seen separately, thoughunder the leadership of the President. One is the academic area, which is thelargest and in our institution includes the area of student affairs, housingand that whole array. The second area is business affairs which is the physi­cal plant, custodial services, bookkeeping, etc. The third general area isthe public side of the college, which ordinarily includes public relations andfund raising. This is the organization of FHS and Dr. Ei ckhof f feels it isproperly so organized. Did Mr. Rupp have something more specific?

Mr. Rupp ·ans wer ed th&t it was probably more specific.

Dr. Eickhoff replied that if one were to start a brand new institution, withno history and no personalities attached to it, one might make a 'f ew changes.However, he believes in a reasonable pace for anything. "A meat-axe approachfor an institution this size is, almost without exception, going to turn outbad. " He likes to think of his "approach to administration as a very patientone, but with the clock running, ... you know there is a time when the alarmgoes off." Problem areas should be identified and a reasonable time appointedto resolve those problems. "Sometimes, as we all know, you just wait untilnature takes its course. On that I 'wi l l conclude, Mr. President." Dr.Eickhoff left the meeting.

. 12

. 106

6

IV. Mr. Rupp announced that before he bowed out as President of the FacultySenate, he would like to thank all members of the Senate for cooperation inthe past. He especially thanked the Executive Committee and Vera Thomasfor her excellent work as Secretary and finally Betty Wolfe for her work inassisting us with secretarial duties in June and July. Thank you very much.Mr. Rupp then turned over the meeting to Dr. Charles Votaw, Faculty SenatePresident for 1976-77.

V. Dr. Votaw announced as the first order of business, the election ofVice-president and Secretary. Before proceeding to an election of Vice­president, Dr. Votaw called attention to some corrections of the FacultySenate list of members. The Math Dept. is now entitled to two members andMs. ,El l en Veed is the second representative from Mathematics. Ms. SueTrauth will replace Dr. Isaac Catt for the Speech Department.

Dr. Votaw then opened nominations for Vice-President.Dr. Miller nominated Ms. Ellen Veed.Dr. Zakrzewski nominated Dr. Cliff Edwards.Dr. Miller suggested that a second is required for nominations.Dr. Votaw answered that normally nominations are not seconded.Dr. Frerer nominated Dr. Rick Zakrzewski.Dr. Votaw called for further nominations.Dr. Drinan moved that nominations cease and the motion was seconded by Dr.Miller.Dr. Votaw put the question and it carried.Dr. Robertson asked if an absolute majority of those voting or of the entiremembership is required for election.Dr. Votaw stated that by precedent absolute majority of those voting is re~

quired.

Mr. Dan Rupp and Ms. Vera Thomas acted as tellers and tallied the votes forVice-President:

Ms. Ellen Veed.Dr. Rick Zakrzewski .Dr. Cliff Edwards . .

,Dr . V~taw announced a run-off election was necessary between Ms. Veed and Dr.Zakrzewski.Ms. Ellen Veed was elected Vice-President of the Faculty Senate for 1976-77.

Dr. Votaw introduced discussion concerning the duties of the Faculty SenateSecretary. The Senate meeting was being tape" , recorded because PresidentTomanek had agreed in principle that the Secretary should not have to actuallyrecord the minutes of the meeting. A classified person is not available fortaking the minutes and the President will supply someone to transcribe thetape for the Senate Secretary. Several members expressed'their views in agree­ment with Dr. Votaw that the Senate Secretary should not have to sit and takenotes in the meeting. Dr. Votaw feels that the Secretary should approve anddistribute the minutes. The By-laws only require the Secretary to keep theminutes, not record the minutes.

7

Dr. Edwards nominated Ms. Es t a Lou Ri l ey for Facul t y Senat e Secre t ar y .Dr. Drinan nominated Dr . Allan Bus ch.Dr. Zakrzewski moved that nominations cease and Dr. Drinan s e conde d the motion.Dr . Votaw asked for any di scus s ion on t he ques t i on .Dr. Busch s t at ed his objection t o his name placed in nomination be ca use i fthe taping system fails and there i s no clas sifi ed pe rson to take t he minute s ,he will not be able to perform the duties of Secretary.Dr. Votaw asked for any further discussion.Dr. Smith expressed his wish that Dr. Busch's concerns are taken care of. Heasked whether someone nominated must give consent to serve if elected?Dr. Votaw referred the question to Mr. Ginther, who confirmed that by sectionsof the By-laws, any nominee must give ass ent to serve before they may be el­ected.Dr. Votaw then ~sked Qr . Busch if he wished to accept his nomination. L

Dr. Busch replied that under the conditions expressed by Dr. Votaw on theduties of the Secretary he would accept nomination.Dr. Votaw called for further discussion on the que stion to close nominationsfor Secretary.Dr. Zakrzewski asked whether the Vice-President and Secr etar y serve on s t and­ing committees?Dr. Votaw repli ed t ha t gener a l l y they do not. They s e r ve on the ExecutiveCommittee and the of f i cers appoint the standi ng committees. There i s no r e a­s on why they may not~ however.Dr. Zakrzewski asked whether it would caus e a hardship to po stpone the electionof Secretary until t he Senate Pr e s i dent could explore the possibility of ac­quiring a classified s ecr et ar y , or s omeone who can t ak e shorthand?Mr. Rupp stated that he feels the administration had already committed itselflast fall to providing some assistance. The only reason it was not done lastfall was because Vera Thomas preferred to take the minutes herself.Ms. Thomas replied that s he was willing to do it. If she were to be respons i blefor the minutes, s he preferred to record them. However , assurances were givenlast fall that civil service personnel would be furnished. The only reasonsomebody was not here was because no one was available right today.Dr. Votaw stated that was not correct. President Tomanek does not have anycivil service personnel available; his alternative was to try taping the minutes.There i? a committment to assist in taping the minut es and transcribing the

.t apes .

Dr. Busch inquired why if the Graduate Council i s entitled to a professionalsecretary, the Faculty Senate is not?Dr. Votaw stated that President Tomanek sees no reason why the Faculty Senateshould not have such a person; the problem is that none are avai~able.

The Graduate Council is served by the Graduate Dean's secretary.Dr. Zakrzewski asked whether each department now had a secretary and perhapsone of those individuals could be used at each meeting?Dr. Votaw said it was not true that each department had a classified secretary.Dr. Zakrzewski asked whether, for the few meetings the Senate has during theyear, a different person might be assigned each time?Ms. Thomas stated that i t would be extremely difficult for a new person torecord the minutes at each meeting. Consistency would be a major problem.Dr. " ot aw said that t he Senat e does at least have a committment from the ad­ministration to attempt somethirig.

8

Dr. Drinan suggested that the Senate proceed with the election 6f the Secretary.Dr. Votaw said that officers may resign if they feel they cannot perform theirduties. He then put the question to close nominations for Secretary. Themotion carried.Mr. Rupp and Ms. Thomas acted as tellers for the election of Secretary. Dr.Allan Busch was elected Secretary of the Faculty Senate for 1976-77.

VI. Dr . . Votaw made the following announcements.

The KU Executive Committee Minutes state that the Vice-Chancellor has inter­preted the 30 days sick leave in the Regents' policy as 30 calendar days ratherthan working days. Dr. Votaw is not convinced that interpretation is correct.

The Regents have issued a new "Policy and Procedures Manual", only recently'pub l i shed and adopted in July 1976. Dr. Votaw Galled attention to the sectionon tenure and fringe benefits for part-time faculty. It is sufficientlyvague that the administration may find part-time faculty mayor may not beentitled to fringe benefits.

The Regents on August 13 approved $4880 from the Emergency Maintenance RepairFund to rebuild the air-conditioner compressor in Malloy Hall.

The enrollment dates for 1977-78 have been established. They are still sub­ject to change; as of now those dates are: June 1st, J~ne 14th, June 28th,July 12th and July 14th.

The FHS report on the proposed new classroom building should be presented tothe Regents this week.

The Regents confirmed that classes will be held on November 11th (Veterans'Day), despite the governor's order giving state employees a holiday. Classeswill be held. However, classified personnel will have the day off.

Dr. Procter of Kansas State College of Pittsburg is expected to recommend toCaCAO at their next meeting that the second semester begin somewhat earlierin J~.r:uary.

Summer enrollment at FHS was down 377 from 1975. The drop was due partly toa workshop not being held, which will be held next year and bring the enroll­ment up again.

Information as of September 1st indicated that FHS enrollment was down 22 fromlast year. Emporia was down 200. Pittsburg was down about 200. Wichita claimedtheirs was "mixed" but probably down about 200. K-State is up 300-400. KUis up at least 600, perhaps 1000. The increases appear to be at the freshman,sophomore and graduate levels, decreases at junior and senior level. At FHSthere is a slight drop at the graduate level. The figures are strictly bodynot FTE~

Work on the College Catalogue is to begin soon and materials should be submitednow ~~r inclusion.

9

The State Board of Education will evaluate our Education Program next spring.This evaluation is for all the Regents' institutions ' and they are beginningwith FHS in the spring.

Mr. Rupp and Dr. Votaw discussed with President Tomanek and Dr. Eickho f f t hechanges in the Faculty Handbook and other matters di s cus s e d in the Senatelast year. Many of the suggested changes have been approved. Others were notacted upon because the President could not gain enough sense from the minutesto make an evaluat ion of what the Senate wanted. ·The College Affairs Commit­tee will have to put those changes into a form which the President can use toapprove or disapprove them. President Tomanek did approve the substitution of"supervisor" for "superior" in the Handbook. President Tomanek has also agreedto consider whether a faculty member may choose textbooks without the Depart­ment Chairman'~ approval but that the Chairman must be informed of al~ selec­tions. Faculty might then place textbook orders so long as the Chairman hasbeen informed.

At 5:00 P.M., September 8th, there were 4523 students on campus by headcount.There were an estimated 643 enrolled in Continuing Education by headcount; thetotal then being 5166, compared to 5141 last year. As of September 8th, FHSwas 25 students above last year. Continuing Education figures may be a littlelow but the on-campus figure is accurate. There may be a few more enrollmentsand some withdrawals. The projected FTE figures, which are not firm, run about4565 compared with 4527 last year~

VII. Dr. Votaw concluded his announcements and moved to committee business.He stated that the By-laws require the Senate officers to appoint the stand­ing committees and temporary chairpersons. Every member serves on a committeeand there are four such committees. Each committee elects its own officers(chairperson and s ecr e t ar y ) . The permanent chairpersons then join the officersto form the Executive Committee. The By-laws specify the numbers to serveon each committee and tradition has been to achieve a balance among the olddivisions on each committee. Hopefully, each member may have the first choiceof committee. Wednesday, September 15th, is the deadline to make a committeepreference.

Dr. Votaw then explained the duties of the various committees to give the mem­bers an idea of which committee they preferred.

Dr. Robertson asked if the By-laws Committee i s the appropriate committee forsorting the responses of the administration to previous Senate proposals?

Dr. Votaw responded that he was not sure. Probably it would depend upon whichcommittee submitted the proposal. He is inclined to allow the committees toconsider the responses to their own proposals.

VIII~ Dr. Votaw introduced committee reports.

Dr. Zakrzewski reported for the Academic Affairs Committee. The AcademicAffairs Committee submitted for Senate approval, the following courses:Art ~ O O , Problems in Art 'Therapy; Business 348, Principles of Real Estate;

.Bus i nes s 547, Business Uses of Life and Health Insurance; Music 291, Rock

10

Music; Music 293, Jazz. He stated that the Business courses were intendedsolely for Continuing Education. Music 291 is already offered as "Rock,Folk, and Jazz", but will now be "Rock" and 391 will be offered for GeneralEducat i on . The Academic Affairs Committee moves acceptance of these coursesby the Sena t e . Dr. Busch seconded the motion.

Dr. Votaw put the question and called f or discussion. There being no discus­sion, the question was put and it carried.

Dr. Zakrzewski commented that the Department Chairmen would save the depart­ments and the committee much time if the application forms for new courseswere filled out completely and correctly. They also require the Dean'ssignature and a complete HEGIS number.

Dr. Votaw stated in regard to the applications for new courses that Dr. Eickhoffhad a mild objection to the Senate requirements for new courses going out with­out his seeing them first as he considers it administrative business. Dr. Votawagrees with Dr. Eickhoff on this matter. Despite the fact that some of therules were astablished by the Academic Affairs Committee for its internal opera­tion.

Dr. Votaw and Dr. Eickhoff would like t o have seen the rules before they wereLss ued , Dr. Votaw sent the rules on new course procedures to the DepartmentChairmen.

Dr. Busch said that the Academic Affairs Committee had made the rules beforeDr. Eickhoff became the Vice-President so the committee did not know his wishesin that regard.Dr. Votaw said he understood that, but possibly it would give the Senate someidea of what Dr. Eickhoff considers policy and administration.Dr. Zakrzewski asked if Dr. Eickhoff had any particular objection to the rules?Dr. Votaw answered, no, only to make a point of what the difference betweenpolicy and administration was.

Dr. Votaw then called on Dr. Frerer for the College Affairs Committee.Dr. ~qkrzewski informed the chair that Dr. Frerer had left the meeting and thathe dld have some business from the College Affairs Committee but which couldwait until a later time.Dr. Votaw announced that one of the matters College Affairs must attend to ispulling together some items discussed previously and bring them before theSenate again.

Dr. Votaw then called on the Student Affairs Committee. Dr. Adams, the chair­man, is on leave and Dr. Smith has replaced him, which does not mean Dr. Smithis chairman of Student Affairs, of course. He called for any member of StudentAffairs to report. There was no report.

Dr. Votaw then called on Mr. Ginther to report for the By-laws and Rules Commit­tee. Mr. Ginther said there was no report.

IX. Dr . Votaw called for Old Business. There was no Old Business.

11

x. Dr. Votaw then opened the floor to New Business. He announced that theSenate has been requested to approve an alteration in the Class Schedulefor the Student Counselor-Principal Conference, to be held Tuesday, Novenilier16th. The alteration is to be the usual one, to shorten morning classes, upto 1:00 P.M., by ten minutes out of fifty and fifteen out of seventy-five inall classes before 1:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 16th.

Dr. Drinan moved that Dr. Votaw's report be accepted, and Mr. Rupp secondedthe motion. There being no further discussion, Dr. Votaw put the question,and it carried.

Dr. Votaw announced that the Faculty Senate on March 8, 1976, directed theFaculty Senate President to invite the Student Senate President to appointstudent representatives to participate ex officio on each of the Fa~~lty

Senate committee. It is not clear whether the directive was to be -a standingrule or only for the 1975-76 Senate.Dr. Busch s ugges t ed the matter be referred to the By-laws Committee for areport.Dr. Votaw stated that was the procedure for a standing rule; however, if therule was only for one year, it should return to Student Affairs where itcarne from. If it is to be a standing rule, then the By-laws and Rules Com­mittee must consider the rule.Dr. Votaw then asked for any objections to the By-laws Committee consideringthe rule. There were no objections and it was so ordered.

Dr. Votaw announced that also in the March 8, 1976, meeting the issue ofs t udent evaluation of faculty was sent to the College Affairs Committee. Hefelt that the matter had been referred to committee with no intention that thecommittee act on it.

Dr. Robertson, a member of college Affairs, stated that the committee haddiscussed s t udent eval uat i on of faculty and concluded that the Faculty Senatewas not really concerned as long as the evaluations were not to be used foradministrative purposes.

Dr. Votaw acknowledged Dr. Robertson's remarks, b ut added that the intentionof the evaluations was in fact that they be used f or admi ni s t r a t i ve purposes.He added that at present the issue is probably a de ad one i n the Student Senate.They mayor may not revive it; but there seems little inclination now to do so.

Dr. Votaw introduced discussion of Article 4, Sect. 2 of the By-laws, whereinit is stated that the previous year's Senate President is to preside at the f i rstmeeting of the following year. Dr. Votaw wanted some clarification of this rulebecaus~ the By-laws are not clear on when the change in Presidents is to takeplace. With no objections, Dr. Votaw referred the matter to the By-laws Com­mittee for a report and recommendation.

Dr. Votaw presented another prob+em arising from Article 6, Sect. 4b of theBy-laws, which states no member of the Senate may s er ve on more than one othercollege body. What is an "other body"? - Does the rule mean a member may notserve on more than one campus committee? If so, the rule has been violated oftenand will continue to be violated. With no objections, the matter was referredto the By-laws Committee for a report.

12

Dr. Votaw then asked whether clarification of Article 3, Sect. 3c of Part I ofthe By-laws is in order? The section concerns the increase in a department'srepresentation on the Senate through the addition of new faculty. Senatorsar e to be elected by the third week in April to serve for the followin g year.Shoul d seats in the Senate created by the addition of new faculty be treateda s vacancies in the new year? The Biology Dept. has s uch a vacancy now. How­ever, the rules state Senators are to be elected by the third week in Aprilfor the following year. Has the Senate violated the rule in seating new Senatorselected after the third week in April. If such elections are conducted underthe provisions for vacancies, then the rules have been complied with.Mr. Ginther stated that he felt a vacancy has been created by the addition ofnew faculty. .Dr. Votaw had no objection to Mr. Ginther's interpretation and that if thereare no objections, he directs that the Senate Minutes formally state thatin the future when new Senate seats are created by the addition of new facultyafter the third week in April~ those seats will be considered vacancies to befilled for a three year term.Mr. Ginther stated that some rewording of the statement would be necessary.Dr. Votaw agreed and referred the drafting of a statement on the matter to theBy-laws Committee. Dr. Robertson suggested that By-laws Committee also considerthe removal of senate seats should the number of faculty in a department fallbelow the number for two or more seats.Dr. Votaw agreed and it was s o ordered.Dr. Robertson further questioned what procedure would be followed should thenumber of f a cul t y f a l l during the term of a Senator?Dr . Votaw referred the question to the By-laws Committee.Dr. Votaw announced that the feelings of the Senate should be expressed onpreliminaries to the selection of seniors to "Who,' s Who in American Collegesand Universities". With no objections, the matter was referred to the StudentAffairs Committee.Dr. Votaw introduced the question of the Faculty Senate President's appoint­ments to the College Tenure Committee. Dr. Votaw's final tenure hearing is tobe conducted this year and he sees a conflict of interest, should he appointmembers to the committee. Therefore, he proposed that the Academic AffairsCommittee, which as constituted for 1975-76 contains the largest number oftenu~ep faculty, should select the faculty appointments to the College TenureCommittee. He added that Dr. Busch is the only non-tenured member of theAcademic Affairs Committee, and he would be exempted from participation in thecommittee action. Six appointments are to be made.Mr. Ginther moved acceptance of Dr. Votaw's proposal that the Academic AffairsCommittee make the selection of appointments to the College Tenure Committeefor 1976-77.Dr. Robertson seconded the motion.Dr. Votaw then called for discussion.Dr. Edwards asked if the appointments must come from the Faculty Senate?Dr. Votaw answered, no, only from tenured facul.ty members at large.Ms. Veed asked if appointments must be tenured, full professors?Dr. Votaw replied that they probably need only be tenured faculty, at leastassistant professors and three-years service or more. However, President Tomanekor Dr. 'Ei ckhof f , whoever make the final approval, will decide; but appointmentssho~d at least be tenured to avoid conflict of interest.There being no further discussion, Dr. Votaw put the question and it carried.

13

Dr. Votaw announced that the officers will be appointing the standing Commit­tees and temporary chairpersons for 1976-77. The committees must then meetwithin two weeks of the last Faculty Senate Meeting (that is, by Monday,Sept ember 27th) to elect permanent officers (chairman and secretary). An Ex­e cut i ve Committee meeting will then be held to determine the agenda of the nextFaculty Senat e meeting, which will be Tuesday, Oct ober 11th at 3:30 P.M. in theSanta Fe Room. Following meetings will be Monday, November 8th and Tuesday,December 7th.

Dr. Drinan moved that the Faculty Senate enter in the minutes its thanks toMr. Dan Rupp, the retiring Senate President and the members of the ExecutiveCommittee for a "job well done last year."Dr. Miller seconded the motion.Dr. Votaw call~d for discussion. There being no discussion, he put ' the ques­tion and it carried.

There being no further New Business, Dr. Votaw asked for a motion to adjourn.Mr. Ginther moved adjournment and Dr. Drinan seconded the motion. With noobjections, Dr. Votaw adjourned the meeting at 5:37 P.M,

Respectfully submitted,

Allan BuschSecretary